Policy on Research Misconduct
Enacted July 26, 2008
Revised December 7, 2011
Revised March 1, 2020
Revised January 31, 2022
Chapter 1:General Provision
Article 1 (Purpose)
The purpose of this regulation is to establish publication ethics for papers submitted, published, and published (scheduled) to the Korea Internet Information Society (hereinafter referred to as the society) to prevent scientific misconduct by members and to present basic principles and directions necessary to comply with the thesis ethical regulations.
Article 2 (Subjects)
regulation shall apply to all society members who present and publish papers and to their published works.
Article 3 (Scope)
Unless there is other separate regulation with regards to the thesis ethics establishment and verification, this regulation shall be observed.
Chapter 2: Ethical Regulations
Article 4 (Fundamentals)
All authors who present and contribute papers at this conference shall contribute papers in accordance with the scholar’s conscience and comply with these ethical regulations as prescribed in the articles of association for the purpose of research advancement.
Article 5 (Definition of Terms and V iolations)
Acts contrary to the thesis ethics (hereinafter referred to as "misconduct") are counterfeit, tampering, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and unfair authorship credit. The violation descriptions are as follows:
① 'Forgery' refers to the act of producing non-existent data or research results.
② ‘Manipulation’ refers to the act of artificially altering research materials, equipment, processes, etc., or distorting thesis contents or results by artificially transforming or deleting data.
③ ‘Plagiarism’ refers to the act of creating a false perception for a 3rd party that the work is originally his or hers, by withholding sufficient source citation. This applies to creative ideas or works that are not part of general knowledge.
1. All or part of another person’s research content is used as-is without source citation.
2. Word and/or sentence structures of another person's work are partially modified and used without source citation.
3. Another person’s original ideas and other creations are used without source citation.
4. Another person’s work is translated and used without sufficient source citation.
④ ’Self-plagiarism’ refers to the act of reusing as-is or with slight modification a considerable part of a copyrighted thesis already published in another journal without clear citation or reference.
⑤ ‘Unfair thesis authorship attribution" refers to the act of not granting an authorship/credit to someone who has made a scientific/technical contribution or the act of granting authorship, acknowledgment, or honor to someone who did not contribute to the research content or results without legitimate justification.
1. Authorship is granted when there were no contribution to the research content or results
2. Authorship is not granted when there were contribution to the research contents or results
3. Works of research students are published in an academic journal under the sole name of the professor
⑥ ‘Unfair duplicate publication’ refers to the act of a researcher earning unjust profits, such as receiving research funds or recognition as a special research work after publishing works identical or substantially similar to his or her previous research results without source citation.
⑦ ‘Public fraudulence’ refers to the act of stating falsely about one's educational background, career, qualification, research achievements, and results.
⑧ Intentionally obstruct the investigation of alleged misconduct of the person or another person or inflict harm to the informant.
⑨ Reports received after 10 years since research misconduct are not processed . However, cases received after 10 years must be addressed if they pose a risk or a potential risk to public welfare or safety or if the investigator him or herself committed the same misconduct in order to plan for follow-up research, apply for a research grant, conduct research, or use in research reports and/or presentations within 5 years.
⑩ Although not applicable to the above paragraph, misconducts that may become social issues shall be referred to the Ministry of Education’s “Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics” and reviewed and determined by the thesis committee.
Article 6 (Mandatory Compliance with Ethical Regulations)
Members of this society must agree to comply with the ethical regulations when submitting a thesis.
Article 7 (Composition and Operation of the Research Ethics Committee)
The Committee shall be composed of 1 chairperson and 5 members, and the selection method for the chairperson and members shall be governed by the academic society’s bylaws
Article 8 (Chairperson)
The chairperson represents the committee and convenes and presides over meetings.
Article 9 (Executive Secretary)
The ethics committee may have one executive secretary to manage the committee’s affairs.
Article 10 (Meeting)
The chairperson shall convene the committee members for a meeting and shall be the speaker thereof, and the meeting shall be ruled with the attendance of the majority of incumbent assembly members and more than half of the present members’ approval. Except for preliminary investigation, the chairperson may judge ex officio or refer to a written deliberation.
Article 11 (Preliminary Investigation and Main Investigation )
The term "preliminary investigation" refers to a procedure necessary to determine whether official investigation is appropriate for allegations of misconduct.
The term "main investigation" refers to a procedure for substantiating the truth about allegations of misconduct.
① The ethics committee shall form a preliminary investigation committee with no more than 3 members within 3 weeks from the reception date of the report.
② The investigation shall be initiated within 2 weeks from the date of formation of the preliminary investigation committee, and the investigation implementation status shall be decided within 30 days.
③ The research ethics committee shall give informants and investigators not only an opportunity to state their opinions but also an opportunity to raise objections and plead against the outcome of this investigation. If the party involved does not respond to this, it is deemed that there is no objection.
④ The informants and investigators’ proposal and argument objecting to the outcome of this investigation and proceedings shall be included in the report resulting from the investigation.
⑤ The informant and investigator are informed in writing the results of the preliminary investigation after passing the ethics committee’s vote within 2 weeks.
Article 12 (Request for Submission Materials)
The ethics committee may request informants, investigators, witnesses, and witnesses to submit supplementary materials, and the investigators must respond.
Article 13 (Confidentiality and Protection of Rights of Informants and Investigators)
In any case, the identity of informants shall not be exposed directly or indirectly, and the informants’ names shall not be included in the report resulting from the investigation unless necessary for the sake of protecting the informant.
Until the misconduct verification process is completed, all matters relating to the investigation, such as reporting, investigation, deliberation, decision, and recommendation, shall be kept secret, and a person who directly or indirectly participated in the investigation shall not divulge any information acquired during the investigation and realization of his/her duties. However, if there is a reasonable need for disclosure, information may be disclosed through the Committee’s determination.
Article 14 (Guarantee of Right to Objection and Argument)
The ethics committee shall ensure equal rights and opportunities to state opinions, objections, and pleadings to the Committee's executive secretary and investigators, and shall inform about the relevant procedures in advance.
If an informant or an investigator is discontent and intends to raise an objection against the committee’s decision, he or she may request in writing for the research ethics committee to reconsider within 2 weeks from the date of notification of the decision.
Article 15 (Judgment)
The ethics committee shall determine the details and results of the investigation based on the provided objection or argument and notify the informant and investigator.
If no agreement is reached on the details and results of the investigation, it may be reached by a vote with the attendance of the majority of incumbent members and approval of at least two-thirds of the present members.
If an informant or an investigator is discontent and intends to raise an objection against the investigation results, he or she may request in writing an explanation statement for the committee to reconsider within 2 weeks from the date of notification of the decision.
The ethics committee shall decide whether to reconsider within 10 days after receiving the statement, and if it decides to reconsider and review the validity of the statement, either the same investigation committee may be convened or a new investigation committee shall convene within 10 days.
If reconsideration is decided, the investigation committee in charge of retrial shall re-investigate the objected matter within 30 days from the convocation of the investigation committee, finalize the procedure , and notify both the informant and investigator.
Article 16 (Submission of Decision Report)
The ethics committee shall report to the society’s president within 10 days after the investigation decision (hereinafter referred to as the "decision report").
The decision report shall include the following points:
① The report specifics
② The paper under investigation in allegations of misconduct and other related papers
③ The role of the investigator with respect to the paper, argument objecting to the investigation results, and validity of allegations
④ Relevant evidence and witnesses
⑤ The informants and investigators’ objections or pleading with regards to the investigation and the results thereof
⑥ Recommendation on levels of disciplinary action
⑦ Roster of the research ethics committee’s investigators
⑧ Other matters deemed necessary by the committee
Chapter 3: Measure after Verification
Article 17 (Measures against Consequences)
With regards to those associated with misconduct, the ethics committee may propose disciplinary action to the president if a majority of members is present and two-thirds of the present members approve, and the president shall determine appropriate disciplinary action and notify in writing the relevant author.
Matters concerning disciplinary measures may be determined based on other relevant regulations or separately.
① The president shall report to the board of directors and immediately implement the decision of the research ethics committee
② Specify the facts and reasons for withdrawal of the relevant paper and disclose it on the society’s academic journal and website as a measure to preserve. Remove the thesis in question from the thesis list on the society's website.
③ When confirming the misconduct of co-authors of related parties, their agencies (schools of admission and education, research-related institutions, etc.) that have benefited from the paper are notified of scientific misconduct.
④ If the review determines that there is a problem with rationality and validity, the board of directors may request the main investigation committee a retrial or a supplementary report. The request of the board of directors is made only as a document stating the specific reason.
⑤ If the investigation by the main investigation committee reveals that the investigator's actions are not punishable, the research ethics committee shall make efforts to restore the investigator’s reputation and rights.
Article 18 (Level of Disciplinary Action)
When there is a disciplinary suggestion by the ethics committee, the president of the society shall take the disciplinary measures described next and determine the level of disciplinary action. Other disciplinary measures deemed more appropriate than the following ones may be used.
① Expulsion
② Revocation of authority and prohibition of citation of the paper
③ A written open apology
④ Notification of disciplinary details to the Korea Research Foundation and author's agency
⑤ Three-year prohibition of paper submission
⑥ Notification of disciplinary details to the relevant research support agency for a paper that was supported by research funds
⑦ Other matters deemed necessary by the committee
Ariticle 19 (Records Storage and Disclosure)
Records on investigation, related matter, and disciplinary measures shall be kept at the society’s secretariat for 3 years after termination.
Although the final report may be disclosed after the decision is made, information related to identity, such as lists of informants, investigators, witnesses, references, and advisors, may be excluded from the disclosure if doing so has the potential to cause liability issues.)
Article 20 (Operational Details)
Other details necessary for the operation of the ethics committee shall be separately deliberated and determined by the ethics committee.
Article 21
Other matters not prescribed in this article shall be judged in accordance with relevant laws and regulations of the society.
Chapter 4: Authorship
Ariticle 22
- Practical contribution to the concept/design of the work. Obtaining, analyzing, and interpreting data with regards to the work.
- Draft and make important revisions for the work’s important points.
- Final approval of the version to be published.
- Responsible for all aspects of the work to ensure that questions with regards to the accuracy or integrity of the work are properly investigated and resolved.
Supplementary Provision
1. This revised regulation shall come into effect as of December 7, 2011.
2. This revised regulation shall come into effect as of March 1, 2020.
3. This revised regulation shall come into effect on February 1, 2022.
